38 Comments for “Breaking Free of Identity Politics”

“With identity politics off the table, it was possible to talk about all kinds of things—religion, philosophy, history, myth—in a different way.”

We could always just lampshade it. This allows us to say anything we want by acknowledging the out of place IP event and setting it aside. Look at that, I got the New York Times’ Lampshade right here: “Sarah Jeong said some evil things, and she did it and she absolutely did it. The end. Our next article is about the carbon footprint of free range escargot.”

After decades of British Imperialism in China and after China’s attacks from Japan while it was allied with genocidal white heterosexual gentile supremacist Adolf Hitler, Sarah Jeong has earned the right to throw shade at the oppressor classes. Or does free speech only apply to white racists?

Leftists fetishize poverty and demonize wealth and those who create it. They turn every city they touch into a ghetto. Every single one. Then they blame everyone but themselves for the end results of that for which they and they alone are responsible.

Peterson is a wanker. Much of his claims fall squarely in the line of self help,books: and for a great analysis and funny take, see trans women Natalie Wynn Parrott, Contrapoints..https://youtu.be/4LqZdkkBDas

I live, as y’all might have noticed, where Identity politics for White folks who aren’t over the War Between the State is marketed as “Southern Heritage”..but that’s not a concern for Peterson..
Pushback from Scott Lemieux on Caitlin Flanagan’s piece: “To interrupt here, the idea that “identity politics” is “off the table” when you’re dealing with Jordan Peterson’s male chauvanist ressentiment is beyond absurd.

it was possible to talk about all kinds of things—religion, philosophy, history, myth—in a different way. They could have a direct experience with ideas, not one mediated by ideology.

1)There is no such thing as an experience with these ideas unmediated by ideology, and even if there was Peterson sure as hell ain’t it.

“Because all of this was happening silently, called down from satellites and poured in through earbuds—and not on campus free-speech zones where it could be monitored, shouted down, and reported to the appropriate authorities—the left was late in realizing what an enormous problem it was becoming for it.”

This portrayal of campus life is, of course, fantastical. Who is monitoring this speech constantly? What authorities? This is just gibberish.”
Several commenters have noted his invention of “Post Modernist neoMarxism” as a scarecrow for anti-social Justice workers…
And Andrew Sullivan’s attachment to “the Bell Curve” and pseudoscientific racism as promulgated by Murray, et. al. Is shameful. He said folks opposing the Iraq War were “fifth columnists” for radical Islam, and I refuse to allow him to speak for me.

The most racist whites BAR NONE are members of the Slaveocrat Party. You and you alone are to blame for the systemic racism that still grips this country to this day, and you will never be forgiven for it. Now gays, Jews, and people of color are waking up to your duplicity and walking away.

More from Lemieux:”
This is, again, essentially a bunch of insults devoid of content. “Obliterating?” “Irrational?” “No coherent reason?”

At this point, a remotely serious piece edited by a competent editor would actually discuss some specific, lengthy critiques of Peterson, such as the three linked above. Flanagan…does not do this. Nellie Bowles’s superb profile, which she passes over without serious engagement, is the only actual disagreement with Peterson cited. There’s no reason to believe that Flanagan is aware of their existence, or indeed did any research for the piece at all. Her generalizations are completely without foundation.

Instead, she quickly moves on to discuss Nation poem-ghazi, the hiring of Sarah Jeong (with the bad faith claims about her taken completely at face value, natch), a claim that Barack Obama is “the poet laureate of identity politics (?)” and a claim that this is all “at least partly responsible for the election of Donald Trump.” In other words, baseless claims followed by a bunch of conservative identity politics mad libs.

Transcult-supporting libfem handmaid word salad does not a critique make. At some point you need to admit that Peterson is right about lots of key points and that only a misandrist would disagree with it. You also need to admit that the Regressive Left deserves to be hoisted on its own petard of identity politics since you invented it to project your own bigotry onto your political opponents.

Misandry is real and it enables homophobia. Gay men need to start standing up for men. I’m tired of being expected to throw my own sex on the sword — literally and figuratively — out of guilt over men who have had enough of dealing with female bigotry and duplicity. Women instigate all manner of violence against men in all sorts of ways, from spiritual violence to sexual violence to out-and-out physical violence, and this gay man has had enough of being expected to put these breeder bitches on a pedestal at gay men’s expense, or at any man’s expense, honestly. Men don’t need to smear toxic chemicals all over our bodies to be beautiful.

Sarah Jeong is not a racist because racism is when non-gay non-Jewish whites project their inferiority onto everyone else in order to justify their oppressive words and deeds. It’s not okay to be white unless you’re gay.

Bless you heart, Matthew…
Google “Jordan Peterson Homosexuality”;the first video I came upon was a 4:46 sec. intense rap on the superiority of “the intact family” (Dad, mom, kids) that’s pretty much what one hears from conservatives, particularly Catholic ones, and how it’s good for society.. In general, that’s not a bad point: but he ignores the actual state of marriage, and that, like it or not many folks are in single parent households. He ignores the abusive intact families, he doesn’t seem to know that a lot of GLBT folks get kids in straight marriages..
Grrr..I told my wife i was bi (though didn’t do much about it) before we married. Her response (as a pragmatic country woman and feminist Vogue reader) said “of course you are! Just keep it out of the county, and dont present me with a scandal..” We had two beautiful kids: I was always the nuturing parent, with babies strapped to me in a Snugli in the studio as i did art and she had the “REAL JOB”. After she died, i raised them and a foster kid,.as well as periodically putting up and number of kids kicked out by their parents. I couldn’t have done it without the help , love and support of my boyfriend.
And I’ve read that close to a majority of minority GLBT couples have at least one minor child. Many folks marry young, and don’t figure out their sexuality until they’ve had kids…He doesn’t seem to notice the people who reject the “modeling” of his ideas of masculine dominate behavior that he believes is innate, and it’s supression tied to..well, a host of social ills.,he doesn’t get that kids often model themselves after not family.
And then digresses to the glories of mascu”roughhouse” ( my wife and I both roughhoused, but because my dad was abusive with power (and basically sought to beat the gay out of me) I made sure the roughhousing never became bullying or violent. Maybe it’s because we both grew up on farms…
He cites studies he says prove his contention, but, a bit of digging shows those studies to be at best suggestive of his views. I studied theology, and find most evolutional Psychology (looking for truth and of human behavior in animal and guesses about biology) akin to medieval theologians finding biblical and spiritual allegories in nature: ultimately it tells us mom about the theologians and evolutional psychologists.
I don’t Fear Petersen: but I loathe his belief in male supremacy, and opposition to feminism. His conviction that women in power bring chaos, his approval of rigid binary gender roles, his odd Jundianism (he actually sounds a bit like the “anima haunted man” Jung wrote about, turning his feminine side into his Shadow) are in no way scientific, and suggest fascism.https://youtu.be/8QsJqb8QW1I

There you go again, trying to impose Right Wing Political Correctness.
Your position is the same as my former Libertarian friend:”I don’t have anything in common with those Frans freaks! I don’t want to be associated with them!” I told him that as far as much of the Right is concerned they think he was just the same as those freaks..
I don’t get genderdisphoria, but am willing to believe the folks who claim it: it’s not my place, or Matthew’s place, or Petersen’s place to tell them what to feel.
And I recognize that if they don’t have rights, I don’t have rights..if they want to be my ally, great. I you don’’t, well, you’re missing out.

There’s no such thing as “Right Wing Political Correctness.” If anything that’s a redundant statement because the right wing is called the right wing because it is right. The left wing, therefore, is the wrong wing, and you keep proving that time and time again with your sexist homophobic fetish for genital mutilation.

Matthew, what’s the deal then? How should we treat trans folks? What should government policy be for them? Forced behavior modification? Concentration camps?
Should women be treated as equals, or does your ideas about the evil of women require male supremacy and the subornation of women?
I was raised in a climate where boys were supposed to play sports, and not care for academics: my Uncle was the principal, and former football coach. I was a big strong farm kid who preferred books, music and art to sports, and was roundly abused for it. My dad abused me, and I determined, if I ever had kids, to not hit or dominate them; and they have repaid me by being the sort of folks who give me hope for this old world. I now know Dad was just passing along what was done to him, and now, as I’m taking care of him, he’s apologized. I broke the chain of abuse..the late wife had a stint as a social worker: and while some women surely abuse men, the great majority of domestic abuse cases in her experience (and any study ever) were men, over 90%.
I don’t have to support your idea of masculinity, and know the toxic version of it, which Peterson would facilitate, runs rampant in my neck of the woods.
Peterson’s Claims to be basing his claims in science are of a piece of the Alpha Male idiocy I see in too much of the gay world:. The author of the original Alpha wolf study has disowned its claims: as they were based on penned up wolves who reacted a dominance hierarchy. In the wild, Alpha wolves are just good and nurturing dads . It’s like the folks who mistake Fight Club as a desirable form of masculinity, missing the author and filmmaker’s intent to satirize toxic masculinity..

Alpha-male bashing is misandry. Projecting heterosexual male character defects onto gay men is misandry and homophobia. Calling masculinity toxic is a form of anti-gay anti-male transcult social conditioning.

“The world is full of snake oil salesmen; why should this one concern us particularly? Because male self-pity is a killer. There’s a white supremacist in the White House, and far-rightist violence — both Islamic and Anglo-Saxon — is a clear and present threat. In the wake of yet another mass shooting in the United States — the high school massacre in Parkland, Florida, where a teenage gunman has taken 17 innocent lives — it’s high time we gave up the complacent pretense that toxic machismo is merely an adolescent affectation or a symptom of some nebulous thing called “mental illness.” Yes, it’s a pathology; but it’s also an ideology, a system of thought in its own right, with its own intellectuals and proselytizers. In the current climate it behooves us to be extra vigilant about the creeping normalization of reactionary chauvinism, and call it out when we see it. What happens in the realm of discourse has consequences in the real world.
Admittedly it’s not always easy to distinguish between a harmless retro eccentric and a peddler of poisonous and potentially murderous ideas. So let’s take stock: Masculinist persecution myth? Check. Repeated appeals to Darwinism to justify social hierarchies? Check. A left-wing conspiracy to take over the culture? Check. Romanticization of suffering? Check. Neurotic angst about “chaos”? Check. Like many of his sort, Peterson sees himself as a defender of the best traditions of Western civilization and the Enlightenment. But there is an old adage: if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, chances are it’s a duck.“ https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/a-messiah-cum-surrogate-dad-for-gormless-dimwits-on-jordan-b-petersons-12-rules-for-life/#!

None of this would be happening if everyone on Earth was both gay and Jewish. You’re the one who’s fearmongering and projecting that fear onto everyone smart enough to call you out on it, and you know it, so just admit it.

Yesterday my son passed his Pharmacy certification test, and has his doctorate of Pharmacy. He and his girlfriend are going to get married in a few months. My foster son is a CPA and doing quite well (his mom had succumbed to meth: she used to be a beautiful woman, and looks like a little old man..) my daughter and her husband are in Japan, He serving his country in the Navy, she’s working for Support services for sailors and their families.
I worked hard, in construction (mostly log homes as that’s the fashion here) and have been a biological success, in terms of reproduction…
The other kids I put up are oh: one, a self described genderqueer (he was like that before we me, and his idiot redneck father went to jail for abusing Brandon’s mom. And selling..meth, is working at a hair salon and is regarded as Fabulous. At least several kids now have, as a model, a construction worker and former artist who can cook good as their image of a gay man.
Matthew, maybe you should meet some actual trans folks and see what they think..if it matters..
Yes, misandry exists.: and I wonder if you’ve been hurt by a woman. We should not succumb to Petersen’s framing that posits a permanent war between men and women.

No one said Alpha Males don’t exist: but that the conclusion that the hierarchy formed by dominance and physical superiority isn’t what happens in nature:and that we accept analogies to suggest policy outcomes from the like of Peterson at our intellectual peril: from those Transactivist Misandrists at Wikipedia:”In the past, the prevailing view on grey wolf packs was that they consisted of individuals vying with each other for dominance, with dominant grey wolves being referred to as the “alpha” male and female, and the subordinates as “beta” and “omega” wolves. This terminology was first used in 1947 by Rudolf Schenkel of the University of Basel, who based his findings on researching the behaviour of captive grey wolves.[13] This view on gray wolf pack dynamics was later popularized by L. David Mech in his 1970 book The Wolf. He formally disavowed this terminology in 1999, explaining that it was heavily based on the behavior of captive packs consisting of unrelated individuals, an error reflecting the once prevailing view that wild pack formation occurred in winter among independent gray wolves. Later research on wild gray wolves revealed that the pack is usually a family consisting of a breeding pair and its offspring of the previous 1–3 years.[14]

In some other wild canids, the alpha male may not have exclusive access to the alpha female;[15] moreover, other pack members as in the African wild dog (Lycaon pictus) may guard the maternity den used by the alpha female.[16]

Controversy Edit

Researcher L. David Mech, one of the primary creators of the Alpha male hypothesis for wolves, later found additional evidence that the concept of an Alpha male may have been an erroneous interpretation of incomplete data and formally disavowed this terminology in 1999. He explained that it was heavily based on the behavior of captive packs consisting of unrelated individuals, an error reflecting the once prevailing view that wild pack formation occurred in winter among independent gray wolves. Later research on wild gray wolves revealed that the pack is usually a family consisting of a breeding pair and its offspring of the previous 1–3 years.[17]

Researcher M.W. Foster investigated primates and found that the leaders were more likely to be those who did more for those around them instead of being determined by strength. [18]”

Mech has disavowed earlier book, and asked his publisher to pull it from circulation.
Again, Peterson’s use of animal analogies to illuminate human behavior is not scientific: and the examples he throws out are often not quite the proof of the rightness and inevitably of Human male dominance.
And that’s a good part of his argumention: he pulls out the analogy that supports his contention, never mind that the actual research might not show what he says, and ignores real research that contradicts those studies. He is not scientific in this argumention.

Wikipedia is not a source for anything, and only jenn-durr-critical sources will even be considered as valid for any matters regarding human sexuality or for any of your pathetically futile attempts to debunk Jordan Peterson. The carb industry hates his guts because he is living proof that they are responsible for a lot more diseases than should be legal.

Comments are closed.

ADVERTISEMENT

Welcome

IGF CultureWatch is a blog that originated with the Independent Gay Forum, a group of writers and activists who focused on advancing LGBT legal equality and social inclusion beyond ideological rigidity and leftwing orthodoxy. more